I previously wrote
on the constitutionality of the federal government seizure of private telephone
records from cell phone supplier Verizon.
My position was that the federal seizure violates the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution, which has its roots in English law. As support for my position, I quoted the 1765 case of Entick v. Carrington, in which Charles Pratt, 1st Earl Camden ruled that the search and seizure of all of Entick's papers was unlawful, since the warrant lacked probable cause to justify the search.
After my first writing, the situation has escalated. The person who leaked the information to the British newspaper Guardian has been identified as Edward Snowden, which is not especially significant.
Much more important is a statement by US Rep. Peter King. He is also Chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence. He said, “The National Security Agency [NSA who seized the records] does not listen to Americans’ phone calls, and it is not reading Americans’ emails.” But referring back to the Entik v.Carrington case of 1765, there is no mention that Entick's papers had to be read in order to be unlawful. The mere search and seizure was enough to declare illegality. In the present case of the search and seizure, no probable cause was shown.
Sen. Rand Paul (Kentucky) is obviously on the right track of declaring the seizure operation illegal. Persecution of leaker Snowden seems to be a side issue to take attention away from the obvious deficiency of the NSA in this operation.
My position was that the federal seizure violates the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution, which has its roots in English law. As support for my position, I quoted the 1765 case of Entick v. Carrington, in which Charles Pratt, 1st Earl Camden ruled that the search and seizure of all of Entick's papers was unlawful, since the warrant lacked probable cause to justify the search.
After my first writing, the situation has escalated. The person who leaked the information to the British newspaper Guardian has been identified as Edward Snowden, which is not especially significant.
Much more important is a statement by US Rep. Peter King. He is also Chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence. He said, “The National Security Agency [NSA who seized the records] does not listen to Americans’ phone calls, and it is not reading Americans’ emails.” But referring back to the Entik v.Carrington case of 1765, there is no mention that Entick's papers had to be read in order to be unlawful. The mere search and seizure was enough to declare illegality. In the present case of the search and seizure, no probable cause was shown.
Sen. Rand Paul (Kentucky) is obviously on the right track of declaring the seizure operation illegal. Persecution of leaker Snowden seems to be a side issue to take attention away from the obvious deficiency of the NSA in this operation.
You are exactly correct that it does not matter if the conversations are in fact listened to, the fact that the government has the information creates opportunity for tyranny and is in obvious direct violation of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution.
ReplyDelete